SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1998 Supreme(SC) 142

J.JAGANNADHA RAO, S.SAGHIR AHMAD
Tarsem Singh – Appellant
Versus
Sukhminder Singh – Respondent


Judgment

S. Saghir Ahmad, J.-Delay condoned.

2. The defendant is the petitioner in this Special Leave Petition before us.

3. The petitioner, who owned 48 kanals 11 marlas of agricultural land in village Panjetha, Tehsil and District Patiala, entered into a contract for sale of that land with the respondent on 20.5.1988 @ Rs. 24,000/- per acre. At the time of the execution of the agreement, an amount of Rs. 77,000/- was paid to the petitioner as earnest money. Since the petitioner did not execute the sale deed in favour of the respondent in terms of the agreement although the respondent was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract, the latter, namely, the respondent filed the suit for Specific Performance against the petitioner which was decreed by the trial Court. The decree was modi­fied in appeal by the Additional District Judge who was of the opinion that the parties to the agreement, namely, the petitioner and re­spondent both suffered from a mistake of fact as to the area of the land which was proposed to be sold as also the price (sale-consideration) whether it was to be paid at the rate of per “Bigha” or per “Kanal”. The Lower Appellate Court also found that the




































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top